Sola Scriptura - who has the correct interpretation of the WORD?

[LittleLambofJesus]

I believe the Church of Christ teaches "Sola Scriptura" the best.

Many other demonitations have twisted scriptures that they find "unreasonable." (i.e. baptism)

I have been to a few CoC services and I must admit, it is a far cry from the Pentcostal/charismatic services. Another words, no instruments or music.
Btw, what are their views on the Amill Doctrine? Just curious. Peace

http://www.gotquestions.org/amillennialism.html

According to Amillennialism, the millennium of Revelation 20:1–6 is being fulfilled spiritually in the present age before the return of Jesus Christ. Thus, the millennium or kingdom of Christ is in existence now. Amillennialists affirm that the millennium began with the resurrection and/or ascension of Christ and will be consummated when Jesus returns again to establish the Eternal Kingdom that is discussed in Revelation 21–22.

 

[thereselittleflower]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Melethiel
If you have nothing to do but make wisecracks, kindly leave.​

I do not want any wisecracks either. I do not think TLF was doing that.

Thank you Jack for understanding and speaking words of wisdom below.


I am very interested in your question and seeing a direct answer given to it.

Posting is a touchy business sometimes because we can not see each others faces or hear each others tones or see the body language. I heard that what we say is only 40% of how we communicate.

I think it is more like 10-20% of what we say

Excellent points.

 

[thereselittleflower]

I have been to a few CoC services and I must admit, it is a far cry from the Pentcostal/charismatic services. Another words, no instruments or music.
Btw, what are their views on the Amill Doctrine? Just curious. Peace

http://www.gotquestions.org/amillennialism.html

According to Amillennialism, the millennium of Revelation 20:1–6 is being fulfilled spiritually in the present age before the return of Jesus Christ. Thus, the millennium or kingdom of Christ is in existence now. Amillennialists affirm that the millennium began with the resurrection and/or ascension of Christ and will be consummated when Jesus returns again to establish the Eternal Kingdom that is discussed in Revelation 21–22.

What does this have to do with the topic of this thread?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

This brings to mind Paul’s oral instructions on the Eucharist [1 Cor 11:34] and Protestants anxiously awaiting the publication in the Antiochian Post of the last apostle’s obituary, at which point they are to rewrite their book of church order and eliminate everything based on oral instructions.

That should be interesting.

1 Corin 7:26 I am lawlizing then this, ideal to be belonging because of the being present distress, that ideal to a man thus to be: 27 You been bound to a wife? No be seeking to be loosed!. Thou hast been loosed from a wife? No be seeking a wife.

Romans 13:11 And this knowing the time, that hour it-is already out of sleep to be roused, for now is-near/egguteron <1452> of us the Salvation than when we believed.
12 The Night progresses, the yet Day has-neared/hggiken <1448> (5758). We should be putting off then the works of the Darkness, we should be putting on the implements of the Light.

 

[simonthezealot]

As TLF writely pointed out before, God allowed even an ass to be guided by the HS.
Why not regenrate CHRISTians in the scripture interpretations?

 

[sunlover1]

You question seems very clear to me Jack. I am wondering why no one has yet answered it.....

It was a great question.
I answered it on the second page.

Those to whom God makes those 'hidden' truths known
through revelation, because they themselves have
prepared their hearts to receive truth:

13 Therefore speak I to them in parables:
because they seeing see not;
and hearing they hear not,
neither do they understand.
14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias,
which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand;
and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
15 For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing,
and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes,
and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart,
and should be converted, and I should heal them.

16 But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear.
17 For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous men
have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them;
and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them.

18 Hear ye therefore the parable of the sower.
19 When any one heareth the word of the kingdom,
and understandeth it not,

then cometh the wicked one,

and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart.
This is he which received seed by the way side.

That one understood it not.
The wayside, or footpath, is very hard ground
that's been travelled over and over and over.
(our group has ALWAYS believed this way,
or traditions of men as Jesus spoke of etc,
unwillingness to receive, hearts that have
waxed gross, eyes closed, ears plugged
to the seed)

Then there's the rocky dirt
And then the thorny, weedy choking soil.

Then the good ground;
it's known as he that
hears the word
understands
bears fruit
brings forth...


23 But he that received seed into the good ground is:

1. he that heareth the word,
2. and understandeth it;
3. which also beareth fruit,
4. and bringeth forth,
5. some an hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

As TLF writely pointed out before, God allowed even an ass to be guided by the HS.
Why not regenrate CHRISTians in the scripture interpretations?

Are you trying to imply something here?

 

[Melethiel]

Thanks for the clarification between, Solo an Sola. I can see where Sola Scriptura would have more checks and balances, than Solo Scriptura. But I was wondering who "we" are....what I mean by that, is it authorities within Luthernism, that interpret scripture....or does the laity have a role in defining and interpreting scripture?


Peace be with you...Pam

We primarily go by the Lutheran Confessions.

 

[Albion]

This brings to mind Paul’s oral instructions on the Eucharist [1 Cor 11:34]

Paul says there that he'll discuss "other things."

To make that ("other things") into a giant loophole by which to create all manner of new doctrines is not right. It's certainly not fair to Paul.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

I believe the Church of Christ teaches "Sola Scriptura" the best.

Many other demonitations have twisted scriptures that they find "unreasonable." (i.e. baptism)

Please elaborate.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

SO when do you actually want to discuss the Scriptures?

Start another thread.

I think I need to keep my beliefs to myself in this thread since it is for those that teach Sola Scriptura. Just trying to stay on topic.

 

[squint]

Didn't John have to be in the SPIRIT to vision Revelation?

Reve 2:17 The one having an ear let him hear! what the Spirit is saying to the Out-Called: To the one conquering I shall be giving to him of the manna, of the having been hidden, and I shall be giving him a counter/yhfon <5586> and on the counter/yhfon <5586> a name, new, having been written which no one has seen if no/except the one obtaining.

Reve 13:18 Here the Wisdom is the one having Mind let him calculate/yhfisatw <5585> (5657) the number the number of the wild-beast/N for of man it is and the number of it six hundred sixty six. [Luke 14:28 uses "calculating"]

"Write what you see..."

A "doer" of Word does Word

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Start another thread.

I think I need to keep my beliefs to myself in this thread since it is for those that teach Sola Scriptura. Just trying to stay on topic.

Do you have some views that may go against the RC denomination's views? Just curious

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Paul says there that he'll discuss "other things."

To make that ("other things") into a giant loophole by which to create all manner of new doctrines is not right. It's certainly not fair to Paul.

In this thread it is your teachings that should be heard.

Those that teach Sola Scriptura.

I have seen a Lutheran give some counsel.
I have seen a CoC give counsel.

Even Simon said something...


I hope to read more.

 

[Albion]

In this thread it is your teachings that should be heard.

Those that teach Sola Scriptura.

I have seen a Lutheran give some counsel.
I have seen a CoC give counsel.

Even Simon said something...


I hope to read more.

I appreciate that. However, the misrepresentation of a Bible verse like that should not be let pass without setting the record straight. Anyone could have done it. I merely read and replied first. No discussion, just pointing out what it actually says. Now we move on.

As for my commentary on SS, it's cleancut. We all agree that the Bible is divine revelation, don't we? Then all that we on the SS side are saying is, it's of unimpeachable authority. Also, God must have meant it to be sufficient for us or else he'd have added more to it. How can either of those propositions be denied?

To second-guess the sufficiency of the Word of God, and claim that we have to have this or that human's ideas bolted onto the Word of God does not make sense to me. If there were a reason, I'd hear it and listern carefully. But, I was a Roman Catholic, you know, and it was because there is nothing more sufficient or accurate than the Word of God that I rejected Tradition, the commentary and ideas of ordinary men.

The Church doesn't even adhere to its own definition of what supposedly makes Tradition a second stream of divine revelation, so it clearly (IMO) is false, and scripture is all we have to count on. Besides, the Bible itself says that it contains all that we need to know, so what argument can there be for adding anything to it?

I hope that's something along the lines of what you were asking me to contribute.

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

Obviously, it's the Lutheran interpretation of the Scriptures that's correct.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Thanks Albion.

I had mentioned some scripture ealrier and asked how it should be interpretated as a way to get things going.

Would you care to comment?

For example which interpretation of "This is My Body" is correct?

[bible]matthew 26:26[/bible]


Is it symbolic or literal or poetic or ...

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Obviously, it's the Lutheran interpretation of the Scriptures that's correct.

LOL


But that is a valid claim as a Lutheran I think. If you believe this then why?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

LOL


But that is a valid claim as a Lutheran I think. If you believe this then why?

For the same reason you think Catholicism is a valid claim.

 

[Albion]

Thanks Albion.

I had mentioned some scripture ealrier and asked how it should be interpretated as a way to get things going.

Would you care to comment?

The answer does not lie exclusively in the words of institution (This my body, etc) although that's the way most of these debates go. It's also in what he says afterwards about the meal and the Apostles repeating it after he's gone from Earth.

Because that wording suggests a transcendent meaning, the bread and wine appear to mean more than just symbols, not even symbols which call valuable memories to mind when the Eucharist is celebrated, or bond the communicants together. In addition, there is evidence from very early times that the first Christians saw the meal as more than just a symbol.

Therefore, we believe that in some way, it is Christ's person. But at the same time, we have no reason to think that it is LITERALLY parts of that same body he used on Earth, and we know that this idea didn't come into play until well into the Middle Ages. Transubstantiation is purely and completely a theory out of the Medieval mindset, as well as being dated from the Middle Ages, not the Apostolic period.

I'm answering to the question you asked, Jack, but I don't see how it relates to Sola Scriptura. Sola Scriptura is not a way of interpreting. It is a commitment to what it is that we trust. Then comes the interpretation once we know what to interpret.